Last week, Strongville, OH added themselves to the list of Ohio cities that has repealed their breed-specific law. Like many Ohio communities, their local law mirrored the state law and while the change in the state law would allow them to keep their restrictions on specific breeds, they opted to go with a breed neuteral one. The law is expected to be approved later this month.

Similarly, Geneva on the Lake, OH also repealed their breed-specific law. Village Administrator Jim Hockaday noted that breed indentification was a point of contention for a breed-specific law and that the council believed "that there are less confoluted and effective means of achieving the same end."

Congrats to these communities for stepping up for what is right and repealing their breed-targeting laws. And congrats to the advocates in these communities who are helping make it happen. More good news to come, I'm sure.

April 20, 2011

Yesterday, Lucas County (OH) Dog Warden Julie Lyle announced that the county had received a $38,400 grant from PetSmart Charities to help them partner with Humane Ohio and offer very low cost spay/neuter services for pit bull type dogs. With the "Fix-a-bull" program, up to 500 dogs can be altered for $5 and be microchiped so dogs can more easily be returned to their owners.

The program is in response to continuingly large numbers of 'pit bull type' dogs making their way into the shelter in Lucas County and the shelter's commitment to lowering kill rates. Lyle estimates that about 40% of the dogs taken in by the dog warden's office are 'pit bulls' or 'pit bull mixes' -- and only 11% are returned to their owners.

Lyle was hired last spring after taking over for long-time dog warden Tom Skeldon - who resigned amid public pressure due to the shelter's poor performance.

Lyle's changes have increased the number of dogs saved at the Lucas County Shelter.

In 2010, 1,544 dogs were killed at the city pound -- down 21% from the 1,951 killed in 2009 and 38% from the 2,483 killed in 2008 - Skeldon's last complete year as Dog Warden (some programs put in place in late 2009 afer Skeldon resigned and because of public pressure helped increase adoptions at the very end of 2009).

Much of the credit goes to improved relations with the Toledo Area Humane Society which accepted more than twice the number of transfers in 2010 as they did in 2009.

Lyle continues to make improvements to the old-school catch and kill philosophy of her predecesor -- and the dogs are becoming much better off because of it. There is a lot of work to be done, and rebuilding relationships with owners of 'pit bull' type dogs will take awhile after years of being targeted by Skeldon and even having a financial incentive for Skeldon to confiscate and kill their dogs.

But working with the rescues in the community, making a good effort to be compassionate, and working WITH 'pit bull' owners instead of against them, are all great steps toward a better community for animals in Toledo.

October 12, 2010

This afternoon, the City Council in Toledo voted in favor of a new dangerous dog ordinance. The ordinance, which now defines a viction dog based on its behavior, not it's 'breed', will replace the long-time breed-specific ordinance in the city.

The law also contains harsher fines for dog bites and restrictions on how long a dog can be chained up in the community. The law also requires dogs to be altered at the owner's expense and give animal control the ability to seize dogs if the owners are deemed reckless (I do not know how that is defined).

Things are not 100% free and clear in Toledo, as residents still fall under the state law that deems 'pit bulls' as vicious -- however, that law is also up for debate when the state Senate session begins again next month (a bill removing breed specific legislation from the state law passed in the House of Representatives last Spring).

The admitted failings of Toledo's old law, the forced resignation of the dog warden who supported it, the lawsuits and the court rulings againt the law became too much and the law has finally been repealed.

August 05, 2010

Late last year, after months of public pressure over high shelter kill rates, draconian policies, and lawsuits of failed breed idendification, old-school mentality dog warden Tom Skeldon resigned from this position as dog warden.

In his place, the county hired a new dog warden, Julie Lyle, that actually seems to be taking her job seriously -- to not only protect people from dogs, but to protect the animals from people - -including ceasing to kill them in the shelter.

And the early results seem to be a step in the right direction.

For the month of July, 135 dogs were euthanized at the county shelter -- compared to 219 during the same month last year under Skeldon's rain. This is a 38% decrease in shelter killings. Pit bull type dogs too are getting a new lease on life. This year, 63 'pit bulls' were killed a the shelter compared to 97 only a year ago -- a 35% increase. Adoptions from the shelter have nearly tripled.

"The numbers don't lie," said Lucas County Commissioner Ben Konop. "There are more dogs who we are saving and who are not being put to death by a large margin under Miss Lyle then there were under the previous dog warden, and that's a good thing."

The shelter still has a long way to go -- but seem to be making progress. It is amazing what a huge difference it makes just having a compassionate animal control director compared to someone who is mired in the old catch and kill mentality. Progressive shelter leadership continues to show it is the primary differentiator between animals dying in the shelter and animals getting a second chance at life.

The difference has also shown in the lives that are saved. Last week, the Toledo Blade ran an article about Amos. Amos was the first 'pit bull' to be transferred from the Lucas County Dog Warden's office to the local humane society and is now enjoying his life playing fetch with his new owner. Prior to Amos, and under Tom Skeldon's watch, all 'pit bulls' were killed at the shelter regardless of temperament.

It's time to move on from the old-school catch-and-kill mentality directors....as Lucas County, OH appears to have done.

May 21, 2010

The Toledo Free Press (Toledo's alternative weekly newspaper) has a feature article today on former Lucas County Dog Warden Tom Skeldon. For decades, Skeldon has been the voice for the kill all pit bull advocates, and I found the article interesting for a variety of reasons I'll get into in a bit.

Since his resignation, the Toledo Area Humane Society has reversed its long-time policy that prevented them from adopting out 'pit bulls', and the county has formed a Dog Warden Advisory Committee to look at changes to the city's dangerous dog law that will focus on the dog's behavior, not it's breed. The county's current law was found unconstitutional by a district court because it was contradictory to the state law.

The article begins with a story about Skeldon as a young boy learning from his father (who was a director at the Toledo zoo) not to love animals -- because if you love animals, you will be heart broken all the time, and "you won't be able to do the job and make the decisions that are required."

So, if there was any doubt before, there is none now, Skeldon was taught by his father not to love animals - -which is why euthanizing 77% of the animals at the shelter was not a problem for him.

But then, Skeldon goes on, to issue a warning to the city:

"This spring, summer, fall, here in Toledo, there will be a number of people mauled, maimed, disfigured and there may be somebody killed by a pit bull,” Skeldon said. "Some little kid is going to pay the price. The word is out in the City of Toledo — the dog warden is no longer enforcing the laws and we can do what we want.”

The director of the Toledo Area Humane society noted that the county is still enforcing laws, but instead of focusing on types of dogs, is focusing on owner responsibility -- a method that has worked in numberous other places. It should also noted that Toledo wasn't exactly the safest community from dog bites under Skeldon's watch.

"Many people who have pit bulls view them as renewable resources, throwaway dogs, a means to an ends whether that is protecting my drug house, winning in a dog fight, just having the macho, toughest dog in town or breeding them to sell them to people who want them for those reasons,” Skeldon said.

The nice woman pictured in the story looks like none of those things. Here's the deal, yes, some people do treat them as throwaway dogs, and to guard drug houses, or to fight them -- but the vast majority of owners aren't those people. By focusing resources on the small percentage of people that are causing problems, you would better be able to solve them, rather than having blanket rules that cover thousands of dog owners than are not causing problems - -and whose dogs aren't problems. You're not going to solve a city's drug house problem with a dog law. And its ridiculous to think that you would.

Interestly, Skeldon then tries to back up this statement with statistics that are more damning than anything. Skeldon notes that in his first year of enforcing Toledo's pit bull law, he and his staff seized 350 pit bulls. The next year, 140, then 90, and then 50 in 1993. But then he blames a rise in gang in cocaine activity for this number going up. The number of pit bulls seized by Skeldon and his staff continued to grow for the next 15 years -- with over 1300 pit bulls being seized (and killed) by the Dog Warden's staff in 2007. What about that makes Skeldon think what he was doing was working? For 20 years the county had been seizing and killing pit bulls -- and the only thing Skeldon had to show for it was more dead pit bulls.

Then they interviewed Merritt Clifton for the story - -who praised Skeldon's efforts for decreasing shelter killing (even though the shelter had one of the highest kill rates in the country, and a the highest in the state of Ohio). As bad as Clifton's bite information is, his data manipulation for shelter euthanasia numbers is possibly worse.

The end of the article notes that Skeldon was asked to step down by County Commissioner Pete Gerken - -Gerken was the only politician that publically stood up for Skeldon and even Gerken asked him in private to resign.

Ben Konop, another County Commissioner who publically called for Skeldon to be fired is quoted as noting that things are moving in the right direction under the new shelter leadership.

"We are definitely heading in the right direction. I would say that Ms. Lyle has come into a very difficult, difficult situation and has done a really remarkable job in a short amount of time. Just in a month, the live release rate has gone up from about 39 percent to 54 percent.

“My concern with the dog warden is that too many adoptable dogs were getting killed and the killing of these dogs had no relation to public safety. What Julie has demonstrated in her first month is that reducing the kill rate at the pound and public safety are not mutually exclusive. You can do both.”

Indeed, you can. And Skeldon lost sight of this because he didn't care about animals -- and was so blindly focused on his catch and kill philosophy that he lost sight of the reality that animal control is responsible for not only the safety of the public, but also the safety of animals. Skeldon never did the latter. He also lost sight of the reality that his model wasn't working.

And for that, he was ousted -- setting a precedence that the old catch & kill mentality is no longer what society wants, or needs. And with that, Skeldon has become little more than a fear-mongerer in the media -- trying to scare people based on no accurate information at all.

It kind of makes my head hurt. The idea that a bureaucrat in an office gets to make the decision on which dogs get killed, vs the person in the shelter that actually handles the dogs makes no sense to me whatsoever. At this point, killing pit bulls has become so ingrained to them, that they can hardly see any other way.

Readers who click through to the links may be a little startled at the beginning of the WTOL article I linked to about the Humane Society. In a story that should be a good article about the Humane Society rethinking its policy of killing all pit bulls, the lead is far from warm and fuzzy.

"Pit bulls can be aggressive and their attacks can be horrifying. In fact, one pit bull is in danger of being euthanized after it mauled a girl over the weekend."

The media wasn't a friend to the 'pit bulls' this week -- with three reports of dog bites in the Toledo area during the same week as they were discussing the possible repeal of the rule prohibiting pit bulls from being adopted from the shelter.

Peter Gerken used the recent stories to help him "justify" the need to keep the policy.

The timing of the media coverage of the bites seems more than just a coincidence. According to the county dog bite numbers from 2007 & 2008, the county has roughly 400 dog bites per year -- so roughly 1 per day. Of those, only about 60 are from 'pit bulls'. So the vast media coverage of the 3 'pit bull' bites during this first week of the new dog warden seems a little, suspicious. Incidentally, over the past 3 years, WTOL has run 19 stories about dog bites/attacks in the community -- 16 of them have been involving 'pit bulls'. Sure seems like the spike in media coverage mirrored their stated agenda on the issue.

Meanwhile, in a separate article that for the life of me I cannot find right now (updated: here's the link) Lucas County Administrator Peter Ujvagi (I originally mistakenly attributed the comment to Ben Konap) noted that Lucas County isn't terribly behind the curve on how the rest of Ohio treats 'pit bulls' in the shelter. According to Konap, 66 of the state's 88 county animal shelters do not adopt out 'pit bulls'. At a time when it's become en vogue to criticize 'pit bull' owners for the number of pit bulls dying in our shelters, clearly, with so many shelters having policies that mandate the killing of all of them that come into the shelter is it any wonder their kill rates are so high?

We must replace this archaic way of thinking and give all dogs with good temperaments a chance in a new home. We should make decisions based on the temperament of the individual dog, not on what it looks like. There is no reason a healthy, happy, loving dog should be instantly killed just because of how it looks. It's ridiculous, and it's the reason the residents of Lucas County ran their old-school, catch-and-kill dog catch out of office.

April 15, 2010

Two contradicting schools of thought were on display in Ohio yesterday. While it seems clear that new, logically thinking will eventually win out over old-school thinking, the Old-Schoolers are not going down without a bit of a fight.

This week, Lucas County, OH's new dog warden, Julie Lyle, took over as the new county dog warden.

Thirty six hours into her job, she got to create her first controversy when she stopped the "euthanasia" of six 'pit bulls' that were scheduled to be killed. Lyle said that Amos was a lovely dog, and she did not wish to kill him, but her hands were tied by the county's policy that prevents 'pit bulls' from being adopted and her administrations self-imposed 30 day ban against Lyle making any operational changes.

My initial reaction is amazement. My presumption is that the county hired Lyle because of her experience, and that based on that experience, would be able to make this sort of policy recommendation without even setting foot inside the shelter first. If the administration really does want to set a positive tone for reducing the killing in the shelter, then they should allow Lyle to set that tone from day one -- and not spend 30 days killing 'pit bulls' because of an old, outdate policy set up by her predecessor.

Meanwhile, all of the candidates for the upcoming County Commissioner's race also expressed the desire to let Lyle change the policy -- including Republican Andy Glenn, George Sarantou and Dan Steingraber and Democrats Mike Zychowicz, Ben Krompak, Earl Murry, Tim Porter, Art Jones and Carol Contrada. All of their comments can be found here (it's worth the read). Current county commissioner Peter Gerken supported the decision to continue the killing for 30 days.

While it seems clear that a new breed of politicians is in place to replace the old-school, outdated thinking and catch-and-kill philosphy of their predecessors, it looks like the old school is hanging onto their outdated policies with their final grasp. The changes are coming...and inevitable.

Former Lucas County Dog Warden, Tom Skeldon -- part of the old-school group and who resigned under political scrutiny last fal - was in attendence to push for the law to remain as-is. I think the fact that his own community decided they were tired of his way of thinking should be a strong signal to the politicians in Columbus of what direction they should go with the law. As the Blade's editorial says:

"Remarkably, Mr. Skeldon was in Columbus yesterday, begging a legislative committee on behalf of the Ohio Dog Warden's Association to keep the state's medieval laws concerning "vicious" breeds. Rather than a credible authority, he stands for everything that's wrong about animal control."

April 08, 2010

The struggles cities are having with their breed bans were front and center in today's news. And it's becoming increasingly evident that enforcing breed bans is costly and ineffective. There are better ways of doing this (suggestions coming tomorrow), but for today, let's focus on three cities that were in the news today for the failures of their BSL -- including one story of a city council person who has forgotten what her actual job is as a city leader.

Sioux City

I don't usually link to a lot of editorials here, but I thought this one from the Sioux City Journal summed up the mess they've created in Sioux City pretty well. Two years after beginning talks of banning 'pit bulls', and 18 months after actually passing the ordinance, the city has reached a potentially ugly crossroads.

The city has undergone a series of embarrassments following the law: including unconstitutional paperworks issues, breed identification issues, civils suits and the man who pushed for the ban on pit bulls having his Labrador attack a jogger, then get sentenced to death, and then stolen from the shelter. However, things have come to a head now that a deadline has passed for 'pit bull' owners whose dogs were grandfathered in under the ban had to renew their licenses, and approximately 100 dogs are left unlicensed. The cityjust denied the appeal of a military veteran who tried to license his dog 4 days late -- apparently deciding the dog was better off dead than licensed -- and may face the same scenerio 100 times over. Meanwhile, at least 3 members of the council, and the mayor, have mentioned that they would be in favor of repealing the ban.

So while the council is delaying a conversation about possibly repealing the law, the police are talking about going around and rounding up unlicensed dogs to kill them. The editorial wisely recommends to the council to take a step back before it "unnecessarily crosses a line it later wishes it hadn't."

It's good advice for a city that has seen nothing but headaches and struggle with their Breed Specific Ordinance.

There is a new article in the Denver Daily News that talks about all of the legal bills that are piling up on the city of Denver. There isn't a lot of new information here vs what I talked about last month, but it's worth noting that the mainstream media there is picking up on the issue. The city has already settled one payment for $5,000 in one lawsuit, and has at least $15,000 tied up in just two months in paying a local lawfirm to deal with several other pending cases. Many locally are estimating that the city is spending a quarter of a million dollars in enforcing and defending their law -- at a time when the city is facinng a $120 million budget shortfall.

One thing of particular note in this story are the statements made by Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz who still supports the ban. Faatz says she sent out a survey to her constituents and 78% of them said they favored the ban. "That's the will of my voters, so if it takes defending it, I'm willing to defend it," said Faatz.

Faatz's response is indicitive of what many city council leaders have gotten absolutely wrong when it comes to leading cities.

City leaders are indeed, elected by getting the majority of the votes in their community. However, they still represent EVERYONE in their community, even the ones who didn't vote for them. And they are elected to make decisions on what is best for the city, not necessarily based on the will of the majority. If over the course of history, our elected leaders only did what the MAJORITY of voters wanted, we wouldn't have gotten very far. It certainly would have set back the civil rights movement, and it's possible that women would have never been allowed to vote either -- or that Faatz herself would even have been allowed to hold her position.

No, city leaders are responsible for doing what is best for the city, and what is best for ALL constituents. Not just caving to the will of the majority. In fact, it means, in many cases, that they are responsible for protecting the minority from the majority. There is a difference between doing what is right, and what is best, than doing what people SAY they want.

People may say they want a 'pit bull' ban. But do they? Or is it that they want to know that they are protected and safe from dangerous dogs? Those aren't the same things. And if you asked them which of the two they wanted, most likely they'd choose the latter.

There are absolutely ways to protect people from dangerous dogs, while protecting the minority of people from the majority, and doing so in a way that is both effective and is not a drain on the taxpayer's dollars which are now being diverted to pay for city legal fees. Hiding behind your consitutents is the lazy way out Ms. Faatz. What 1400 people say in a survey does not give you the right to fight for ineffective ordinances that are wasting hundeds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money. It is your job to find effective ordinances and then explain to your constituents why that is a better option to solve their need (being protected from aggressive dogs) and their stated desire (to ban "pit bulls"). Don't hide behind your votes.

Tomorrow, I'll provide recommendations for fair laws that do a better job of addressing dangerous dogs -- so cities can avoid the costliness of what is going on in Denver, the enforcement problems in Sioux City, and the lack of protetion from aggressive non-'pit bull' type dogs that is going on in Toledo. Because really, who wants to dive into the problems listed above?

March 31, 2010

The position is the one that was vacated January 1st when long-time dog-killer Tom Skeldon officially stepped down.

"There was a culture over there for decades that just didn't put a very high value on the lives of animals an in turn, had one of the highest kill rates in all of Ohio," said County Commissioner Ben Konop. "That sort of nonthinking, catch-and-kill mentality hopefully will be long gone. If Julie does what she's saying she's goingt o do, I think we're going to be a shining example of what a dog warden ought to be in 2010."

I confess that I don't know much about Lyle -- but at least she's saying all the right things. Immediate changes she plans to make include:

1) Giving all of the animals names, instead of just being assigned numbers

2) Change how the department handles 'pit bulls' and hopefully reverse the county's long-standing policy against adopting out any 'pit bull' type dogs.

3) Create greater cooperation with area rescue groups and she says she hopes to have an adoption/transfer rate of at least 80% (the shelter's kill rate is currently at 72%).

The idea of what an animal control department is supposed to do is indeed changing -- and no longer is it enough just to operate as a catch and kill dog warden. Society expects that animal control will also protect animals from people -- including being killed in the shelter -- also.

Ms. Lyle begins April 12. I wish her the best of luck in changing over one of the nation's most deadly shelters.

March 24, 2010

The committee that was handling the new dog warden search -- led by County Commissioner Ben Konop - voted unanimously to begin negotiations with Ms. Lyle.

Lyle, who beat out more than 40 candidates for the job, was most recently the Humane Society manager from Marquette, MI. According to at least one report, the Marquette County Humane Society was an open admission shelter that held an adoption rate of around 85%.